Skip to main content

About your Search

20121205
20121213
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
to take a step back and step in a slightly different direction from the fiscal cliff and talk more about long-term and medium-term economic realities we face. in your written testimony to this committee, you warned against kicking the can down the road indefinitely because of the adverse effect that might have on the economy. it might have. i thought your analysis was definitely something we need to pay attention to. as you observed in the failure to make progress in this area now could signal that we have bigger troubles ahead. the moody's analytics model that you used breaks down about 2028. the reason it does that because at that point, the interest on our national debt will start to cripple our economy. recourse. i'm not sure there is a tax increase on the planet that could suddenly fix that. money fast enough. of argentina. i tend to think of this medium and long term risk as the fiscal avalanche. the cliff is something we are approaching now and we can see where it is. we know will hit the cliff. the avalanche is different. the only thing you know about conditions are present. you
a fewtoday we are going to talk about three issues briefly. one is that fiscal cliff, to is the debt ceiling. three is the so-called big deal that has to be done on our debt and deficit. unfortunately those issues, convoluted, especially in this town. they are distinct. the impact each other but they are distinct. this fiscal cliff is an artificial state. congress came in, said this law expires on this date. they extended it wants. they put in the sequestration. it is a date. all they have to do is extend the date and allow themselves time to discuss the issues. instead they are putting it all into a lame duck session. that is a problem. sometimes it leads to bad policy. the fiscal cliff can have real consequences. cbo has said that it would cause a recession if we were to go off the fiscal cliff. i do not dispute that i do point out that in 1993 when these taxes were first put in, many said they will cause a recession. they did not. the economy is improving on its own right now. and getting some much stronger. the impact of the fiscal cliff, while not something to be encouraged, may not be
buy fiscal cliff talks by going to c-span.org and clicking on the link. -- you can read more about the fiscal cliff talks by going to c-span.org and clicking on the link. we will year from representative john larson on the fiscal cliff negotiations. after that, we will hear from stephen ohlemacher. you can see "washington journal" everyday life at 7 p.m. -- 7 a.m. eastern here on c-span. coming up next on c-span, the in going an upcoming german discusses what they want to see and a and budget deal. then david walker and rudy penner discuss the fiscal cliff negotiations. later, a discussion on the potential impacts of the negotiations and state budgets. >> the white house was very controversial, as most americans were. they designed washington city. there was competition. he designed a design for a palace. it was not particularly awe- inspiring. in fact, a european diplomat told congress it was neither large or awe-inspiring. but the answer the congressman gave was the building serves its purpose. it is larger and more elegant. photo mer new york times bodh critic on the white house
in the fiscal cliff discussion, is we are talking about the past for the 2012 taxable year. -- unlike the rest of the fiscal cliff which effects rates that will apply next year. the patch applies for returns we file early next year. if there is no congressional action, there is an abrupt increase in tax on the 2012 taxable year. in 2011, approximately 4 million people paid the amt. if there is not a patch, 30 million people will be required to pay the amt in 2012, and they will pay an additional $90 billion in tax. very few of them have any idea this is on the table. host: is the irs prepared? guest: the irs is fairly unusual, but in a correct position, that congress will do the responsible thing -- they took the position that congress will do the responsible thing. they assumed congress will enact a package before the end of the year, and i think that was the reasonable thing to do because i believe they will do that. however, it does mean if there is not a patch of the tax return filing season next year will be quite chaotic. >> you can see all of that interview at c-span.org. we are live at
caucus chairman talks about negotiations on the so- called fiscal cliff. at 8:30
talks about the so-called fiscal cliff. after that, former white house chief of staff staff join discussion on tax laws. live at 7:00 a.m. eastern, "washington journal" with congressman peter welch from vermont discussing the latest developments in the fiscal deadline negotiations. and then questions on the estate tax and capital gains taxes. washingtonrning's " journal," peter welch on the latest developments on the fiscal cliff negotiations. after that, in look at the estate tax which is set to go up at the end of the year unless congress and the white house at. "washington journal" is live this morning at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> today, politico hosted discussion with bob woodward, author of "the price of politics," and margaux rubio. mike allen moderates the discussion. see it live that to it -- at 8:10 a.m. eastern on c-span 3. >> this weekend, on c-span 3, american history tv, follow harry truman's eldest grandson to hiroshima as they prepare to mark the dropping of the atomic bomb. >> i don't want to argue to argue. at think we're past that. my whole purpose for bei
national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> mitch mcconnell talked about the fiscal click on the floor of the senate. the two parties first sat down to discuss the so-called fiscal cliff, it was widely assumed among republicans that president obama and democrats actually wanted to avoid it. that was the premise that any possible agreement had shown. that was the common goal, or so we thought. over the past couple of weeks it's become increasingly clear to many of us that we were simply wrong about that. incredibly, many top democrats, including the president, seemed perfectly happy -- perfectly happy -- to go off the cliff. that's why the president has been more interested in campaign rallies than actually negotiating a deal. and it explains why the president is now stubbornly insisting on raising tax rates when he himself said just last year that you could raise more revenue from capping deductions and closing loopholes. this isn't about the deficit for them or balance. it's about an ideological campaign that most americans thought would have ended on november 6, and that's also why t
for everything he has done. [laughter] and now we can talk about the fiscal cliff. let me start off just by -- we will do the house rules, except we will cut in half. 30 seconds -- then we will have time to elaborate on all this. i want to go through the panel. what do think the odds are that some kind of the deal will be cut by january 1 in order to avoid sequestration and all the tax hikes? mark, i will start with you. >> i think it is 80% that we will avoid sequestration. the question is, though, is this going to be a big enough deal, and will actually be enough of a down payment that it will lead to something else subsequently that will actually avoid the kind of enormous consequences of $16 trillion of debt? that percentage will be lower than the 80%. >> let's come back to the big picture -- in the short term, by january 1 -- will we avoid the cliff? >> i think it is likely that we avoid it. it does not appear that that is going so well. it is so easy for us just to do the things we need to do. i think the real line in the sand is going to be the debt ceiling. i really do think -- i have sai
minority leader mitch mcconnell also talked about the so-called fiscal cliff on the floor of the senate. >> it was widely assumed among republicans that president obama and democrats back toward to avoid it. that was the common goal, or so we thought. over the past couple of weeks, and has become increasingly clear to many of us that we were simply wrong about that. incredibly, many top democrats, including the president, seemed perfectly happy to go off the cliff. that is why the president has been more interested in campaign rallies than actually negotiating a deal. that explains why the president is stubbornly insisting on raising tax rates when he himself said just last year that you raised more revenue from capping deductions than closing loopholes. this is not about the deficit for them, or balance. it's about an ideological campaign that most americans thought would have ended on november 6. the president said timothy geithner of beer with a proposal -- up here with a proposal that was more a provocation than a proposal, to be perfectly frank about it. it was a message that the p
incomes. significant increases in both are scheduled. as you think about the fiscal cliff and what is coming, one of the few places you can see people responding to it is in their behavior around capital gains and dividends. companies are moving up to how, shareholders take a vintage of a lower rate. i expect you will see more investors realize lower capital gains in order to get lower rates. there is clearly money there. there is clearly money that has interesting, distributional characteristics. that tends to be money that comes from higher income folks. as you think about the political process trying to structure when a package with a revenue goal and a distribution goal, my prediction is you will see at least some of those increases occur. i personally would be surprised if the dividend rate went back up to ordinary rates. the senate would allow it to stay at the capital gains rate, and go it to 15% to 20%. the president initially proposed cutting dividends they the same as capital gains. -- proposed letting dividends stay the same as capital gains. my guess would be that that
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)